**5.3. Third level BEng (honors) in mechatronics**

The BEng (Honors) is at the cornerstone of the Third Level engineering education system. It typically takes 4 years to complete and results in a Level 8 award in the National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ). Following on from the success of the TY-PBWS, E-Cubers designed a 3-week-long BEng-PBWS and conducted at the IT Sligo, in July 2014. The BEng PBWS was focused on both the **BUILD** and **PROGRAM** of the MindCub3r equipment, but from a different perspective; to further analyze the problems affecting the OEE with the objective of developing and implementing solutions (**INVENT**).

During the BEng-PBWS, each student was made responsible for the software modules which fell within their individual scope. This resulted in clearly defined deliverables being achieved with the students demonstrating an ability to analyze, evaluate and create [24] solutions. The complete team were responsible for the required integration testing which was scheduled to be completed in the third week. This enabled the mentor to accurately simulate the work environment. The team members were provided with time limited targets which they had to achieve, while being held responsible for a clearly defined role. All the students stated that they found the BEng-PBWS workshop format much more interesting, and that they learned significantly more than conventional academic lectures or tutorial-based environments. These findings strongly concur with Muller [26] and the 70-20-10 rule model for learning [36].

project which they must deliver in the third semester. The objective is to assist the students to migrate from BEng to MEng level whereby they could both discover problems and define

Industry 3.0 to Industry 4.0: Exploring the Transition http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80347 79

A significant number of students had virtually no interest in participating in the divergent stages of the *Double Diamond Design Process* [37]. They did not want to actively engage in the Discovery or Definition Stages. They simply wanted to be provided with the definition of the *Problem* and then they would participate, ideally in isolation, in the Development and Delivery stages. They were extremely reluctant to engage with their *Peers* in the form group projects, *Passion* for the topic (the same was true with other subjects) was virtually non-existent, so the creation of a *Portfolio* was a non-starter. They were extremely *Passionate* about obtaining the MEng qualification, the career prospects were (incorrectly in my opinion)

But there were several students who were much more open to *Problem* definition and *Prioritization* activities. These students actively *Played* with the technologies. They closely collaborated with their *Peers* and delivered world-class solutions and collaborative *Projects*, they leveraged the E-Cubers Office 365 environment and are well on the way to creating very

Various factors such as personality types, entry grades, age profile and industrial experience were evaluated. The only metric which separated these two groups was industrial experience. But that simply appears to be an indicator of where the individual derives their motivation from as opposed to the explicit value of the experience. It appears that a BEng student who continues directly to a taught MEng, without any industrial experience, may be solely motivated by the extrinsic reward of the MEng qualification. This appears to concur with Pink [38] who outlines that *"Conventional thinking is that the higher the reward the higher the performance but once you get above rudimentary cognitive skill it is the other way around."* While the student with the industrial experience would appear to be engaged with the topic(s) and is truly motivated by *"Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose"* [38]. Basically, students with the industrial experience appear to be *volunteering to learn the topic* while the other students are *voluntold to learn the topic (to obtain the qualification)*. It all appears to center around where individuals

Does the solution lie in catering for each passion with different academic delivery models? It appears that the volunteers are not content unless they get to work on the topic(s). This is ideally suited to the apprenticeship delivery model whereby 30% of the training occurs in an academic environment but 70% of the competency is demonstrated in the working environment; they are the true practitioners of the topic(s). The voluntolds on the other hand want and must be catered for with the conventional but more collaborative academic model. While the true researchers can be catered for with the standard research model centered around very specific or a small number of topics. This enables the definition of three different roles based on the delivery model; namely *Equipment Systems Engineer, Equipment Systems Designer and Equipment Systems Researcher*. By letting the individual pick the role which matches their *Passion* and they can all significantly add value, in very different ways,

assumed, and the topic was virtually irrelevant to them. What a shame!!!

impressive *Portfolios*. They were *Passionate* about the topic(s) not the qualification.

solutions. The results were quite surprising.

derive their *Passion* from.

to the E-Cuber Topic(s).

The BEng students went significantly further than just completing the BEng-PBWS. Under their own initiative they developed and proposed a complimentary pedagogy to augment the existing academic model. In this new model they recommended industrial engagement should occur in September and November during the first year to outline to student's what industry and employers really require. They also recommended workshops of three-week duration in June, July and August of first second and third year respectively. They advised that the third-year workshop should be competitive (*imirt*), only offered to high achievers and they should be paid a stipend during this workshop as they are mentored to identify and develop the concept of a truly significant final year project. They also requested that Industry provides them with periodic supervision during the execution of their final year project. This novel model which was proposed *"by BEng students for BEng students"* delivers more than 250 direct contact hours to students at key milestones in their development, which would significantly enhance their competencies and development.

This clearly demonstrates that skilled and motivated students at both TY and BEng levels are capable of both finding technical solutions and highlight business problems (albeit the business of providing a BEng qualification) which is extremely encouraging. It is important to note that all the participants were volunteers, they were not voluntold. This PBWS workshop was something they wanted to do. The results could have been significantly different if the PBWS method was applied to the full population or there was forced attendance.
